The Tuesday Interview | ‘Waqf report will be tabled in first part of Budget Session’

The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill has witnessed heated exchanges between the Opposition and the treasury bench MPs. The Bill to change the existing law on the maintenance and ownership of Muslim endowment properties is seen as a key political agenda of Modi 3.0.

Speaking with DH’s Sumit Pande, JPC Chairman Jagdambika Pal denies the Opposition’s charges of bias and says the committee’s report will be tabled in the first part of the Budget Session of Parliament beginning this week. Excerpts:

Why did you have to suspend some MPs from proceedings of the JPC on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill? Opposition MPs are comparing the move to the imposition of the Emergency.

If they believe in parliamentary democracy and the Constitution, (they should know that) Parliament holds debates and discussions based on which decisions are taken. If regular meetings of the Committee are being held, where is the question of Emergency?

We are holding discussions with everyone. Mirwaiz Omar Farooq from Jammu and Kashmir was invited. If you disagree with the government’s amendments, you can respond with a note of dissent. You can vote against the amendments when they are taken up clause by clause. But if you think you can impose your will by force or violence, by disruptions, that is not acceptable.

The Opposition MPs allege that the time allotted for deliberations was insufficient.

Whenever meetings were called, ample time was given. When the JPC was formed on August 8 2024, it was tasked to conclude its report in the Winter Session of Parliament. Its term was extended as per their (Opposition) demand. Now, we have to present the report in the Budget Session. Amendments have to be sought to finalise the report, followed by clause-by-clause discussions to submit the draft report to the relevant department so that an amended bill is prepared.

Now that we are completing this task, it appears they (Opposition) are thinking why is this being taken to the logical conclusion? It is not me but the House Speaker who has decided the timeline for the submission of the JPC report.

The Opposition has also alleged that you changed the agenda at the last stage.

In the last meeting, a clause-by-clause discussion was scheduled. The Opposition insisted that Mirwaiz be called, and we agreed. We agreed to hear one more delegation. They have not been deprived of any rights as far as proceedings of the committee are concerned.

What was the objective of the JPC’s visits to multiple states?

We had detailed discussions; we visited Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, and other states. The committee met at least 40 to 50 delegations in each state, including representatives from the state government, minority commission, state Waqf Board etc.

What was your feedback from the Karnataka visit?

In Karnataka, there are farmers who have been tilling their land for hundreds of years. A minister in the state government is in charge of the Minority Welfare Department. By citing Waqf law, claims have been laid on farmers’ land. This has led to protests and agitation by farmers in the state. Their ancestral properties are being claimed as Waqf.

Rebel BJP MLA Basangouda Patil Yatnal also met you in this regard.

We met a lot of people from Karnataka. Tejaswi Surya was there; we also met Union Ministers Pralhad Joshi and Shobha Karandlaje.

When are you planning to submit the report?

We will submit it in the first part of the Budget Session.

The Opposition MPs have plans to complain against you, in writing, to the Lok Sabha Speaker.

They have done it in the past as well. The Speaker has given us a mandate to complete this job in time. For that, we have to hold meetings and speak with all stakeholders. If I failed in holding meetings or did clause-by-clause voting without discussion, I should have been reported to the Speaker. But I have been transparent in conducting the proceedings. I’m following the constitutional procedure.

For the first time, we have seen incidents of bottles being hurled in parliamentary meetings. How do you react to that?

How am I responsible for that? If people are angry, they can write a letter. They can walk out of the meetings or vote against the Bill. The way they approached us, abused us, and raised slogans – it was provocative. Reacting to these provocations could lead to unpleasant situations. This has happened from only one side and we have only tolerated it.